In the entry πάστρα, we read: “A type of card game, xeri.”
However, “πάστρα” is not identical to “ξερή”, and the entry should be amended as follows:
πάστρα: a type of card game, a variation of kontsina, in which the jack collects all the cards on the table
Or even without this rather specialised clarification. If I knew Kontsina but not Pastra, I’d probably understand. But if I don’t even know Kontsina? Will a dictionary definition explain the rules to me?
You can go to our “Kontsina” entry and learn all about it in detail.
Whatever we can note in our entries (not in enormous walls of text), I think is a good thing. After all, distinguished dictionaries do it too (e.g. Proias).
On the other hand, if we don’t want any further clarification/detail (I disagree), then let’s remove them from our other card-game entries too.
Putting things like “rummy: a card game, Pastra: a card game”, and so on, in our card-game entries doesn’t tell me anything…
I did. It certainly has a fair amount of detail. Not, of course, as though it were an actual rulebook for the game. I’m not sure it’s really necessary: how many people are in a position to understand it without already knowing it themselves?
All right, I don’t consider this serious enough to start changing entries beyond those found to contain genuine errors (although, of course, however much one corrects, there is always room for further improvement). But I mentioned it here, where the entry had already been put up for review anyway.
To me, it says: «Ah, right, I see! It’s a card game; it isn’t a synonym for ramoli». If I happen to want more details, well, only then will I look for them.
For koltsina, it says that it is one of the relatively innocent games. That is useful supplementary information.